gnu-linux-libre
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNU-linux-libre] choosealicense.com fork with better wording, perha


From: John Sullivan
Subject: Re: [GNU-linux-libre] choosealicense.com fork with better wording, perhaps ?
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:29:37 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux)

hellekin <address@hidden> writes:

> On 11/11/2014 05:22 PM, John Sullivan wrote:
>>>
>>> Good point. Here's their version:
>>>
>>>> The GPL (V2 or V3) is a copyleft license that requires anyone who
>>>> distributes your code or a derivative work to make the source
>>>> available under the same terms. V3 is similar to V2, but further
>>>> restricts use in hardware that forbids software alterations.
>>>
>>> And, here's my modified version:
>>>
>>>> The GPL (V2 or V3) is a copyleft license that ensures that anyone
>>>> who
>>>> distributes your code or a derivative work will make the source
>>>> available under the same terms. V3 is similar to V2, but ensures
>>>> that
>>>> any hardware it is used in will permit software modifications.
>>>
>>> (Personally, I don't think that "requires" is strong language in the
>>> same way that "further restricts" is, but I've removed it anyway.)
>>
> *** I agree that "requires" here is a statement of a fact.  If "further
> restricts" is replaced, then the whole paragraph loses its derogatory
> meaning.  I would use "ensures" instead of "requires", and "prevents" to
> replace "further restricts", with the result:
>
> The GPL (v2 or v3) is a copyleft license that ensures anyone who
> distributes your code or a derivative work will make the source
> available under the same terms. V3 is similar to v2, but prevents use in
> hardware that forbids software alterations.
>
> The reason I want to propose that alternative is to avoid repeating the
> word "ensures", and stick to the original style to insist on the
> problematic wording.
>

I don't like "prevents use" -- that's also an obstacle, a negative
sounding thing. How about going back to "ensures" for that part, and
switching to "guarantees" for the first use of "ensures"?

-john

-- 
John Sullivan | Executive Director, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: 61A0963B | http://status.fsf.org/johns | http://fsf.org/blogs/RSS

Do you use free software? Donate to join the FSF and support freedom at
<http://www.fsf.org/register_form?referrer=8096>.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]